Apple's patent victory over Samsung could set the stage for a lucrative source of profit for the world's largest company.

Analysts on Wall Street reacted positively to the news that Apple had won its lawsuit against Samsung, proving to a jury that its rival had committed patent infringement. But though Apple was awarded over a billion dollars by the jury, market watchers believe the courtroom win could have ripple effects throughout the smartphone industry that would be in Apple's favor.

Maynard Um with Wells Fargo Securities said in a note to investors on Monday that he believes the royalty revenue stream for Apple as a result of the ruling could be "highly profitable." Apple must still win appeals from Samsung, and would need to be willing to settle future disputes.

Apple calculated that Samsung owed it $250 million in 2010, on estimated sales of 25 million smartphones in 2 million tablets. This year, Samsung sold an estimated 50 million handsets in the second quarter alone, which would result in even greater royalties.

Um estimates that every $250 million in royalty revenue to Apple equals about 20 cents in earnings per share. He has raised his price target range for AAPL stock to between $740 and $760, up from a previous prediction of $640 to $660.

Though the jury awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages, the final amount could be higher, noted analyst Amit Daryanani with RBC Capital Markets. The number decided upon by the jury is a minimum total, and the eventual award could be greater based on the judge's decision.

Beyond Samsung, Daryanani believes the ruling could create more challenges for other smartphone makers who use Google's Android mobile operating system. He believes the decision could prompt both carriers and customers to be apprehensive about using products from Android-based handset makers.

Chris Whitmore of Deutsche Bank said Apple's win was a "major victory" for the iPhone maker. He believes it will either limit Samsung's distribution in the U.S. or handicap its smartphone feature set.

Like Um, Whitmore also believes that Apple could collect a "significant licensing fee" from Samsung for the sale of smartphones.

And Michael Walkley of Canaccord Genuity believes the verdict could lead Samsung to delay near-term product launches, in an effort to design around the patents it has been found guilty of infringing.

"We also believe other Android OEMs, such as HTC, Sony, and LG, will review this patent verdict and potentially alter and delay planned Android smartphones and tablets," he wrote in a note to investors Monday.

While other analysts were quick to forecast their positive outlooks for Apple, Gene Munster with Piper Jaffray pumped the brakes a bit. In his reaction, he told investors that the ruling is "unlikely to meaningfully change" the competitive landscape in the smartphone market.

"We expect Samsung to continue to offer competitive phones to the iPhone in the U.S. and other markets," Munster wrote. " We believe what will truly decide the winners in the smartphone market will be individual hardware and software offerings that excite consumers, and we expect both Apple and Samsung to continue to deliver those experiences regardless of this particular court decision."

However, he does believe that the decision will make it more likely that other lawsuits between Apple and handset makers will move toward settlements. In those settlements, he believes software changes will be the most likely competitive outcome, though money will also likely be exchanged.

"We do not believe further settlements are likely to hamstring Android in any serious way," Munster wrote.

Beyond Samsung, Daryanani believes the ruling could create more challenges for other smartphone makers who use Google's Android mobile operating system. He believes the decision could prompt both carriers and customers to be apprehensive about using products from Android-based handset makers.
----

"We do not believe further settlements are likely to hamstring Android in any serious way," Munster wrote.

Sooo point is, everyone's talking out of their @$$ to make a headline?

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

You wouldn't know what individuality was if it jumped up and bit you on the ass. You're just following the Samesung publicity meme to a T.

Lots of opportunities for Microsoft here as they are already licensing patents to various phone makers.
Also Apple has licensed to Microsoft some iOS features as long as they don't copy Apple's offerings.
Let's hope that Apple did a better job of licensing this time -- than they did with Mac OS.

Well I'm not sure SJ actually gave Bill permission to reverse engineer Mac OS to make Windows in the first place lol. By the time Apple tried to take on the then tiny Microsoft to stop them they were hiding under IBM's apron.

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

I had to look at your previous posts to work if you were serious or not... if you are serious, you are on a different planet to the rest of us

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

This won't drive vendors to MSFT, since they want to sell phones. Samsung makes billions on its Android phones.

The more funny thing is how Android is killing the telephone market. Only Samsung and Apple are making profit. Rest of the vendors loose money.

And for what? I still don't understand Googles plan. In the Google Vs Oracle trial Google published that they have made 500 million in ad revenue from Android 2009-2011. iOS generates about 2 billion a year in ad revenue to Google. Add to that the cost for the Android project. Google is spending 20 billion and makes less money then if they just used iOS.

Google is a very capable company. Their net services are way better then Apple. (mail/cal/sync/). Why did they choose to clone the iPhone instead of making something by them self like WebOS?

This have to be one of the biggest mistakes in history costing Google over 20 billion so far.

I don't want to sound like I am disagreeing the idea that parts of Android are stolen, but you said that in regards to Microsoft receiving royalties for Android. I have to point out that if you are paying someone a royalty, you are not stealing anything. You are licensing the technology. That is how it is SUPPOSED to work. That is at least one aspect of Android that is within the law, so lets not point to the right approach as if it is wrong. As innovative as Apple is, it isn't going to reinvent the wheel. They surely licenses patents from other companies as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quadra 610

“I will spend my last dying breath if I need to and I will spend every penny of Apple’s $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong” (Steve Jobs, on Android)

Sounds like Jobs knew exactly what he was talking about. It's amazing how so much of what some consider to be his his "crazy talk" turns out to be strangely clear and prescient later on.

We have to be realistic about what the outcome will be here. It is HIGHLY unlikely we will see the death of Android. What we are most likely to see is what this article points to: Apple making millions or billions off of Android in royalties.

I tend to think Steve Jobs would accept that victory, though he'd probably rather Android be gone entirely.

I don't want to sound like I am disagreeing the idea that parts of Android are stolen, but you said that in regards to Microsoft receiving royalties for Android. I have to point out that if you are paying someone a royalty, are not stealing anything. You are licensing the technology. That is how it is SUPPOSED to work. That is only aspect of Android that is perfectly in the law. As innovative as Apple is, it isn't going to reinvent the wheel. They surely licenses patents from other companies and to other companies.

Anything that isn't licensed but violates patents should be considered stolen. We have to be realistic about what the outcome will be here and it is unlikely we will see the death of Android. What we are most likely to see is what this article points to: Apple makes BILLIONS off of Android.

I tend to think Steve Jobs would accept that victory, though he'd probably rather Android be gone entirely.

Good point. However, Google has done virtually nothing in the way of cooperating with licensors. It's the Android OEMs that have come under increasing pressure. Google's mobile IP portfolio is very thin, hence the Moto purchase. Google is content to watch their partners from the sidelines. They file briefs in defense of their partners now and then, but have so far not committed themselves in particular. Probably because it is in their best interests not to. At least not at the moment.

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

Galaxy S3? Galaxy Note?

i've seen both and they are pretty nice. even thought about trading my 4S for a Galaxy Note. I don't talk that much on it but it would be a lot better for reading than my 4S and i don't feel like buying another ipad

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

I'm sure Apple would like to find a few more juries to do Samsung more favors like that. :) Seriously though, if you look at the history, you'll see that Apple approached Samsung years ago. Samsung had a different view and the two companies decided to hash it out in court.

I won't comment on whether "Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality" but they had and continue to have every opportunity to to show it.

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

When ever this will happen nobody in this forum will care, unless life span can be quadrupled. But I don't think Apple will stop innovating that long.

i've seen both and they are pretty nice. even thought about trading my 4S for a Galaxy Note. I don't talk that much on it but it would be a lot better for reading than my 4S and i don't feel like buying another ipad

Galaxy Note looks completely ridiculous when you have to talk on it and try putting it in your pocket. Eeek! Its remote control envy all over again smartphone style.

Google's Android software is the mother of all plagiarism. It copies code lines from Oracle's Java and plagiarizes every features of Apple's mobile OS. Before the advent of the iPhone, RIM's hardware was the target of its plagiarism. Even its intention to distribute its software through the web was shelved in favor of copying Apple's move. Of all the mobile phone softwares in existence, Android is 99% mimicry of the iOS software. As all other softwares have proven: there are other ways of creating softwares without infringing on others' IPs, but Google with its proven record of nefarious activities like advocating IP theft, identity theft and taking authors' works for free has this behaviorism built into its DNA. It is because of Google's behavior that has embolden Samsung, HTC and others to believe that there is only one way to produce a smartphone or a table, and that is to copy Apple's designs.

Every designer is given a clean rectangle to work on and it is up for each designer to come up with its own unique rectangle. If the designer cannot think of a better way to design the rectangle and claimed "prior art" as a defense for its plagiarism, then it deserves to be punished hard. Google, your time for retribution is not far off.

Good point. However, Google has done virtually nothing in the way of cooperating with licensors. It's the Android OEMs that have come under increasing pressure. Google's mobile IP portfolio is very thin, hence the Moto purchase. Google is content to watch their partners from the sidelines. They file briefs in defense of their partners now and then, but have so far not committed themselves in particular. Probably because it is in their best interests not to. At least not at the moment.

I don't see how Apple could ever go after Google over Android. It is difficult to calculate damages for a product Google doesn't sell. That is why Apple is going after handset makers.

What it may come down to is Google being sued by handset makers for legal fees and lost earnings. I think Apple is attempting inspire that mutiny. If handset makers feel using Android makes them a target for an Apple lawsuit, they may just wind up ditching Android for something else. There's already Tizen/MeeGo and, of course, Windows Phone. RIM will probably have to start licensing Blackberry OS soon if they have any chance of survival.

I don't think we've reached mutiny yet though. Samsung makes products that look like Apple products and it was shown they set out to imitate Apple. Whether simply having Android on your phone is enough to violate Apple patents is technically undecided. This case certainly doesn't hurt the argument though.

I have to think Microsoft is really pulling for Apple here. Apple suing over Android is probably the best way to inspire Windows Phone adoption by handset makers.

I don't see how Apple could ever go after Google over Android. It is difficult to calculate damages for a product Google doesn't sell. That is why Apple is going after handset makers.

What it may come down to is Google being sued by handset makers for legal fees and lost earnings. I think Apple is attempting inspire that mutiny. If handset makers feel using Android makes them a target for an Apple lawsuit, they may just wind up ditching Android for something else. There's already Tizen/MeeGo and, of course, Windows Phone. RIM will probably have to start licensing Blackberry OS soon if they have any chance of survival. I don't think we're there yet though. Samsung had knock off that looked like Apple products and it was shown they set out to do so. Whether simply having Android on your phone is enough to violate Apple patents is technically undecided. This case certainly doesn't hurt the argument though.

I have to think Microsoft is really pulling for Apple here. Apple suing over Android is probably the best way to inspire Windows Phone adoption by handset makers.

HP should perhaps rethink entering the mobile market with WebOS.

Mind you the argument that Apple can't sue Google as Google makes no money isn't totally convincing to me. Google makes plenty of money indirectly via advertising as a direct result of Android. Also I would be shocked if the law would see it that way anyway. It would still be illegal to forge dollar bills even if you gave them away. Then I am no lawyer so I could be wrong lol.Edited by digitalclips - 8/27/12 at 7:38am

From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've owned them all.Long on AAPL so biased"Google doesn't sell you anything, Google just sells you!"

Well I'm not sure SJ actually gave Bill permission to reverse engineer Mac OS to make Windows in the first place lol. By the time Apple tried to take on the then tiny Microsoft to stop them they were hiding under IBM's apron.

please, microsoft was never small compared to apple in the past. and the osx thing was 20 years ago.
thus, apple made a few minor blunders in order for the microsoft thing to happen.

but, the .mov file format was almost co-opted (for .asf or .avi) because of microsofts disingenuous video editing pledges. (thus apple allegedly received an infusion of cash from that decision and the rest is history).., and in part why 80 percent of real video editting is done on something that isn't a microsoft video format.. IMO

Job's "I don't need your money" and Cook, "its about the innovation" seems to be Apple's view. I cannot imagine Apple investing much time or effort in leveraging patents as an income stream, and if they did it would either be itty bit with little value to its customers experience or if they made it a big business it would be to allow cloning - won't happen.

They will license patents that do not directly relate to user experience and my bet on FRAND terms even if they are not SEP. Android's challenge will be to create an experience that is not copying Apple, MS and others are doing this, their success is not guaranteed, but then neither was Apple's success in 2007, in fact, it was widely panned as doomed.

MS does have a business model regarding licensing and does make good income from Android with only Google-Motorola as the remaining big hold out. Although if they Metro takes off, we might see the terms for Android get a lot harder.

HP should perhaps rethink entering the mobile market with WebOS.
Mind you the argument that Apple can't sue Google as Google makes no money isn't totally convincing to me. Google makes plenty of money indirectly via advertising as a direct result of Android. Also I would be shocked if the law would see it that way anyway. It would still be illegal to forge dollar bills even if you gave them away. Then I am no lawyer so I could be wrong lol.

I overstated. They could but it would be much more difficult than going after handset makers. Besides, I don't see why Apple would go after Google directly. Stay strategic and don't let emotions get in the way. If Apple plays its cards right, there can chip away at Android and will have no reason to sue Google. If they scare handset makers away from Android, or at least turn them against Google, it would have a far greater impact than suing Google directly ever would. While I still think destroying Android entirely is highly unlikely, Apple's best chance of doing so is to sue the makers of Android phones until no one wants to touch Android with a 10 foot pole. Smaller companies means easier cases. Even if they settle and pay royalties in the short term, those companies that settle will like consider alternatives to Android to avoid paying large royalties to Apple.

And you're exactly right. Google DOES make money off of Android but proving that to a judge or jury just adds complexity. Apple never has to worry about making that argument when suing handset makers. The simpler the case, the more cut and dry the evidence, the easier it is to win.

Case in point: Samsung had a lot more reaching and stretching of "the truth" to do than Apple, and we see where it got them.

Maybe Apple did Samsung a favor in the long run, I'm sure they will design software and hardware that is even better than anything Apple could produce after all Korea like all Asia counties are a hot bed of creativity and individuality.

Google's Android software is the mother of all plagiarism. It copies code lines from Oracle's Java and plagiarizes every features of Apple's mobile OS. Before the advent of the iPhone, RIM's hardware was the target of its plagiarism. Even its intention to distribute its software through the web was shelved in favor of copying Apple's move. Of all the mobile phone softwares in existence, Android is 99% mimicry of the iOS software. As all other softwares have proven: there are other ways of creating softwares without infringing on others' IPs, but Google with its proven record of nefarious activities like advocating IP theft, identity theft and taking authors' works for free has this behaviorism built into its DNA. It is because of Google's behavior that has embolden Samsung, HTC and others to believe that there is only one way to produce a smartphone or a table, and that is to copy Apple's designs.

....

While we are listing the things Android stole, you might as well include the name also.

They started using it long before they actually got "permission" from George Lucas and only paid for it when they were called out on the issue. Stolen, the same with everything else they do. They do seem to pay up when caught red-handed though.

The ironic thing is that George Lucas should not have any say in the matter, since the common use of the term "Android" not only predates his stupid movies by decades, he also uses the term incorrectly (to refer to robots not androids), in any case.

i've seen both and they are pretty nice. even thought about trading my 4S for a Galaxy Note. I don't talk that much on it but it would be a lot better for reading than my 4S and i don't feel like buying another ipad

Liar, you just want a bigger screen for your digital subscription of Big 'Uns. Lol

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

While we are listing the things Android stole, you might as well include the name also.

They started using it long before they actually got "permission" from George Lucas and only paid for it when they were called out on the issue. Stolen, the same with everything else they do. They do seem to pay up when caught red-handed though.

The ironic thing is that George Lucas should not have any say in the matter, since the common use of the term "Android" not only predates his stupid movies by decades, he also uses the term incorrectly (to refer to robots not androids), in any case.

Droid had to be licensed not android. There's a disclaimer on every Droid commercial that the term is being used under license from George Lucas.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX

I tend to think Steve Jobs would accept that victory, though he'd probably rather Android be gone entirely.

Agree - there is no way Android will disappear and I am sure Apple is comfortable with that. I am also sure that in the end everybody, including the consumer will benefit from this verdict if it stands. Like someone said: surely there are more good designers than Jony Ive out there. So let them get to work and think different. I suspect a hell of a lot of designers, even Samsung ones are happy about this outcome. Maybe now they will be tasked with coming up with something cool. How dispiriting can it be for a design team to be tasked with copying?

I overstated. They could but it would be much more difficult than going after handset makers. Besides, I don't see why Apple would go after Google directly. Stay strategic and don't let emotions get in the way. If Apple plays its cards right, there can chip away at Android and will have no reason to sue Google. If they scare handset makers away from Android, or at least turn them against Google, it would have a far greater impact than suing Google directly ever would. While I still think destroying Android entirely is highly unlikely, Apple's best chance of doing so is to sue the makers of Android phones until no one wants to touch Android with a 10 foot pole. Smaller companies means easier cases. Even if they settle and pay royalties in the short term, those companies that settle will like consider alternatives to Android to avoid paying large royalties to Apple.

And you're exactly right. Google DOES make money off of Android but proving that to a judge or jury just adds complexity. Apple never has to worry about making that argument when suing handset makers. The simpler the case, the more cut and dry the evidence, the easier it is to win.

Case in point: Samsung had a lot more reaching and stretching of "the truth" to do than Apple, and we see where it got them.

Don't be surprised if Google abandons Android. Rumor has it that it's only a stepping stone for a Chrome mobile OS.

"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX